Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Losers Talk Secession
“Secession is a deeply American principle,” the outgoing Republican congressman wrote on his website. Evoking America’s secession from England, he added: “There is nothing treasonous or unpatriotic about wanting a federal government that is more responsive to the people it represents.”
How shocking that Paul badly states/reads our history:
It's not like the Founders woke up one sunny day in July and said, "hey, let's declare independence!" Grievances arguably dated back to the Proclamation of 1763, and all those sundry revenue acts and whatnot angered people who resisted with varying degrees of success, all the while wanting to remain British subjects with a say in their own governance, until they were officially branded rebels.
That should put things into perspective when you consider the modern Tea Party movement began whining about 30 nanoseconds after Obama was inaugurated. They had (and still have) representation the Colonials lacked, but lost an election then started yelling and brandishing weapons at Town Hall meetings--after ACA was upheld are now talking about nullification at best and revolution at worst. Quite puzzling...
If only King George III had put up a petition website...
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Losers Talk Secession:
Ron Paul was a nut-job when he took office in 1976. When Ron Paul took office again in 1979 (his terms were disjunct), he was a nut-job. When he took office again in 1997 (after another hiatus), he was a nut-job.
Is it really surprising that Ron Paul is a nut-job in 2012? And does his nutjobbery really say anything generalizable about Texas and Texans? (Hint: NO. We have nut-jobs among our elected officials; so, I'm sure, do you.)
I found this passage from the wiki interesting:
Of the 620 bills that Paul had sponsored through December 2011, over a period of more than 22 years in Congress, only one had been signed into law – a lifetime success rate of less than 0.3%. The sole measure authored by Paul that was ultimately enacted allowed for a federal customhouse to be sold to a local historic preservation society (H.R. 2121 in 2009).
By amending other legislation, he has helped prohibit funding for national identification numbers, funding for federal teacher certification, International Criminal Court jurisdiction over the U.S. military, American participation with any U.N. global tax, and surveillance of peaceful First Amendment activities by citizens.
Why does this man receive so much attention? What is it about him? Or does he simply serve as another excuse to bash Texas and Texans?
Posted by: Steve Bates | Nov 21, 2012 10:14:12 AM
I use him to bash extremists and historical/constitutional illiterates.
Posted by: NTodd Pritsky | Nov 21, 2012 11:07:59 AM
No doubt he is a shining example of both of those things...
Texas deserves its reputation for nutsery, but so do many Southern states and a few not in the South. Parts of Texas... the City of Houston proper, not the 8-county metro area, are actually majority Democratic. Austin, apart from the state government personnel, is majority-minority (Hispanic and African American); I kid you not. But try telling that to the raving Democratic hordes on the threads right after an election, who are more interested in roasting Texas along with Perry. I will not deny it: it is tiresome, and it often comes from people who should know better.
Happy T-day anyway, NTodd!
Posted by: Steve Bates | Nov 21, 2012 9:15:06 PM
I support Austin's secession from TX, should the state do so!
Happy Veggie Turkey back to you and Stella and the feline family!
Posted by: NTodd Pritsky | Nov 21, 2012 9:24:30 PM
So, if Texas tries to succeed, they don't get to keep the Alamo.
That's gotta hurt.
Posted by: Snarki, child of Loki | Nov 21, 2012 10:09:11 PM